ATSB Report - C180 crash Borroloola NT 19/08/25

[red750]

An ATSB occurrence brief details a runway excursion and collision with terrain involving a Cessna 180 at Borroloola Aerodrome, Northern Territory.
--What happened--
On 19 August 2025, a Cessna 180 with a tailwheel landing gear was approaching runway 20 at Borroloola Aerodrome, Northern Territory, in variable, moderate crosswind conditions. There were 2 pilots and 1 passenger on board. Just after touchdown, the aircraft turned into the wind and started to veer left off the runway. The pilot in command initiated a go-around and as the aircraft began to lift off, it continued drifting off the runway. 
The left wheel struck a mound of dirt beside the runway and the wheel departed the aircraft, causing the aircraft to rotate, collide with the ground and skid sideways, subsequently striking a concrete culvert before coming to rest (see image). The aircraft was substantially damaged during the accident, however the 3 people on board were uninjured.
--Safety message--
This accident provides a reminder for pilots to be prepared to conduct a missed approach, particularly in tailwheel aircraft during crosswind conditions. Tailwheel aircraft have less directional stability on the ground due to the location of the centre of gravity behind the main wheels. They are more susceptible to the effects of crosswind and the tail can have a tendency to swing sideways on the ground. They require more active input to maintain directional control and any yaw needs to be corrected immediately as it can quickly lead to a large swing and potential loss of control. If conditions during approach are challenging, an early go-around can provide an opportunity to reassess the landing options and make a reasoned decision about whether to attempt another approach and plan for how to manage the conditions.

--About this report--
Decisions regarding whether to conduct an investigation, and the scope of an investigation, are based on many factors, including the level of safety benefit likely to be obtained from an investigation. For this occurrence, no investigation has been conducted and the ATSB did not verify the accuracy of the information. A brief description has been written using information supplied in the notification and any follow-up information in order to produce a short summary report, and allow for greater industry awareness of potential safety issues and possible safety actions.

 

 

 

 

 

[facthunter]

IF you hit a small twister there's a good possibility you'll end up like this whatever you do. Also watch out when a sea Breeze overcomes an Opposing wind. Sometimes you are just going along for the RIDE and Luck sees you through (Or doesn't). Put in what input you can and don't just panic and ground effect is your friend..  Nev

 

[onetrack]

Red, recheck your story title, Borroloola is not in W.A.

[red750]

Thanks OT, corrected.

[Student Pilot]

"Tailwheel aircraft have less directional stability on the ground due to the location of the centre of gravity behind the main wheels. They are more susceptible to the effects of crosswind and the tail can have a tendency to swing sideways on the ground. They require more active input to maintain directional control and any yaw needs to be corrected immediately as it can quickly lead to a large swing and potential loss of control."

 

Is this for school kids? 

 

 

[facthunter]

It IS from the ATSB  report. What's the % of People who regularly Fly Tailwheel Planes? Those who do would be well aware of this rather ELEMENTARY statement. Some go arounds are very critical manoeuvres.  The most critical you will ever do, for Many People.  Nev

[Moneybox]

My friend flew in on Sunday in the Bristell.

 

 

The wind sock was horizontal with perhaps 20kt SE wind directly 90° to the runway. He stayed for lunch and the wind was just as strong when he was leaving so I suggested he take-off on the 225m taxiway directly into the wind. He's the sort of guy who'd never break any rules so chose to use the runway as he should.

 

 

Is this sort of behaviour frowned upon even if it's the safest option?

 

 

[Student Pilot]

In some circles yes, I have heard of it being done once or twice.

[BurnieM]

Looks like Cue used to have a dirt cross wind runway (from the sat photos).

Oh and a dirt north/south runway.

Replaced by a single sealed SW/NE runway.

 

Edited 21 hours ago by BurnieM

[facthunter]

It's OK If you get away with it and a real pile of Crap if you don't. Getting airborne is optional. Landing (at some time) IS a NECESSITY.. Plus you will look like a dill in court. Nev

[RFguy]

that picture  of the pilot in the bristell shows pilot sitting clearly behind the wing max chord dimension.

I hope the engine weighs 'quite a bit' ...

this sort of weight distribution in lightweight RA aircraft   means aircraft can get quite light in the nose (and hence rearward moving CG)  at zero fuel  (in aircraft that have fuel  forward of wingspar tanks.) 

It doesnt surprise me that a chunk of lead was added up front.

[Blueadventures]

41 minutes ago, RFguy said:

that picture  of the pilot in the bristell shows pilot sitting clearly behind the wing max chord dimension.

I hope the engine weighs 'quite a bit' ...

this sort of weight distribution in lightweight RA aircraft   means aircraft can get quite light in the nose (and hence rearward moving CG)  at zero fuel  (in aircraft that have fuel  forward of wingspar tanks.) 

It doesnt surprise me that a chunk of lead was added up front.

The manufacturer address's balance with mass bolted on the engine, I saw one recently that had two mass weights attached top and bottom of the Rotax 912; it has and E-prop replacing the original Fiti prop.  The factory advises the mass to be attached, it this case for the lighter E-Prop.  (Image of upper mass added.)

Edited 18 hours ago by Blueadventures

[Moneybox]

1 hour ago, facthunter said:

It's OK If you get away with it and a real pile of Crap if you don't. Getting airborne is optional. Landing (at some time) IS a NECESSITY.. Plus you will look like a dill in court. Nev

 

With the velocity of the headwind on the day there'd be no fear of failing to get off the ground in the length of the taxiway. The Bristell has an inflight adjustable prop and lifts off quickly. There's also acres of clear flat ground ahead without obstructions. To me it looked like the simple fix to avoid a strong crosswind. 

[Moneybox]

3 hours ago, BurnieM said:

Looks like Cue used to have a dirt cross wind runway (from the sat photos).

Oh and a dirt north/south runway.

Replaced by a single sealed SW/NE runway.

 

Yes the dirt runway is still there but not maintained.

[RFguy]

given the grave hazards if that added front ballast was removed, I would prefer to see a stamped or otherwise indelible mark used for "Do Not Remove" instead of a texta that will wash off with a bit of petrol.... and added to the ICA log

But, I live in a CASA Schedule 5 world these days.... maybe that's  overdoing it for RAAUS....

[skippydiesel]

Adding ballast, seems to me , to be a cheap & nasty cop out for bad design.

 

Carrying weight, that does nothing other than correct W&B,  impacts negatively on TO/Climb performance and fuel consumption.

 

Other than a whole of airframe redesign, why not move the engine forward.??😈

[RFguy]

which is what people do.. and make change the thrust line with a couple of washers on the mount so there isnt so much thrust  pitch up or down

 

if they moved the engine forward, or rather moved the propellor thrust line forward, they may  need to redo all the certification. 

so, the lead weight was a good bandaid. 

 

yeah, someone F-ed up in the design.

 

 

[Moneybox]

5 minutes ago, skippydiesel said:

Adding ballast, seems to me , to be a cheap & nasty cop out for bad design.

 

Carrying weight, that does nothing other than correct W&B,  impacts negatively on TO/Climb performance and fuel consumption.

 

Other than a whole of airframe redesign, why not move the engine forward.??😈

 

I think that would be a much more expensive fix for the owners. These weights were added aftermarket to improve W&B however I don't think if was a complete cure just an improvement.

[skippydiesel]

1 hour ago, Moneybox said:

 

I think that would be a much more expensive fix for the owners. These weights were added aftermarket to improve W&B however I don't think if was a complete cure just an improvement.

I rest my case - bad design/flight testing.

 

Should never have come to lumps of metal on the engine to correct the problem.

 

Half descent aircraft manufacturer would have supplied new extended engine frame & cowling to suit😈

[onetrack]

I've seen a bloke in a Tiger Moth (many many years ago), in the S.W. of W.A., take off from the apron directly in front of the hangars! He was airborne before he reached the runway!